Home > Inquiries > Rutland Site Allocations DPD Examination in Public

This stage of the EiP into the Rutland Site Allocations DPD considered the issue of compliance with the relevant legal requirements. The DPD contained no allocations for the Council’s second biggest settlement, Uppingham (contrary to the Council’s Core Strategy, which expressly envisaged that it would), on the ground that such allocations would be set out in the emerging Uppingham Neighbourhood Plan, if adopted.

Larkfleet Homes, the owners of significant development interests in Uppingham, objected to this approach on the basis that (i) it was contrary to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and the Local Plan Regulations 2012 for the DPD completely to hive off the question of allocations for part of its area to the Neighbourhood Plan and (ii) the Sustainability Appraisal for the DPD had failed to assess the environmental effects of the policy vacuum resulting from the absence of allocations for Uppingham until such time as a Neighbourhood Plan was adopted and/or the environmental effects of the reasonable alternatives to this approach (in particular, the approach originally envisage by the Core Strategy of the DPD containing allocations for Uppingham) and/or the cumulative effects of the DPD and the Neighbourhood Plan in combination.

Charles Banner appeared at the EiP on behalf of Larkfleet Homes, instructed by Marrons Shakespeares LLP.

icon-accordion-chevron icon-arrow-left icon-arrow-right icon-chevron-down icon-chevron-left icon-cross icon-download icon-letter icon-linked-in icon-phone-outline icon-phone icon-search icon-search icon-select-chevron icon-top-right-corner icon-twitter